HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Winnipeg Jets
Notices

Winnipeg Jets 2013 Draft Talk

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-21-2012, 09:12 PM
  #226
ps241
2.6% chance
 
ps241's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 9,064
vCash: 50
Interesting I am not knowledgable on the draft choices past the top 30 but am working on it this year. I do have to say though that it seems like a great year to have the extra picks, thank you Johnny O!! The way the CBA negociations are progressing (or really not progressing) I am starting to think the season might be lost which really turns this draft process on its head in a year when the draft class sounds "DEEP"!

ps241 is online now  
Old
11-22-2012, 01:57 PM
  #227
Holden Caulfield
Moderator
Perennial Skeptic
 
Holden Caulfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,440
vCash: 500
Oh look, the only bigger joke in the scouting community than Button in Kyle Woodlief drops MacKinnon to #3 and Barkov to #5 for hits on his site...

__________________


Holden Caulfield is online now  
Old
11-22-2012, 02:01 PM
  #228
JetsHomer
Registered User
 
JetsHomer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,028
vCash: 50
I really dont think people do that. How many people care enough about the draft to look up controversial lists? Not enough. I tend to think that these guys have different opinions on prospects.

JetsHomer is online now  
Old
11-22-2012, 04:02 PM
  #229
Paradise
Individual thinker
 
Paradise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Waiverpeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying High View Post
I really dont think people do that. How many people care enough about the draft to look up controversial lists? Not enough. I tend to think that these guys have different opinions on prospects.
They do when it appears in USA Today, lol.

Paradise is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 04:21 PM
  #230
Holden Caulfield
Moderator
Perennial Skeptic
 
Holden Caulfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,440
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying High View Post
I really dont think people do that. How many people care enough about the draft to look up controversial lists? Not enough. I tend to think that these guys have different opinions on prospects.
Guys like Woodlief and Button make their living doing this, you better believe that they care about generating controversy and generating interest for their site/magazine. Sad thing is that it works, I know who Woodlief and Button are, compared to respectable rankings like CSS and ISS which I do not know who runs those things. But that being said, I will buy an ISS draft guide, no chance for a Woodlief and his redline, simply because they are a joke.

Holden Caulfield is online now  
Old
11-22-2012, 06:51 PM
  #231
Sweech
COYS!
 
Sweech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,824
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holden Caulfield View Post
Guys like Woodlief and Button make their living doing this, you better believe that they care about generating controversy and generating interest for their site/magazine. Sad thing is that it works, I know who Woodlief and Button are, compared to respectable rankings like CSS and ISS which I do not know who runs those things. But that being said, I will buy an ISS draft guide, no chance for a Woodlief and his redline, simply because they are a joke.
I have to agree.

Now I will say I actually like Button more than most. He has interesting opinions that are often valid, but he definitely forces his opinions to one side of a spectrum. Quite possibly to generate interest, regardless I still find he does decent draft work.

On the other hand Woodlief has consistently been an idiot. Button often has a track record of being right on strange issues. Woodlief is almost 100% wrong every time. I guess that's a remarkable track record streak of it's own though...

Sweech is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 07:54 PM
  #232
Daddy Longlegs
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 250
vCash: 500
Just found a recent mock draft for the upcoming draft. Jets picked third and took Barkov. Ohhhhhhh how I wish this was actuality. I love this kid. He might be my most coveted player in the draft. If we got first pick I'd have to think long and hard between Mackinnon and Barkov. Mackinnon's skating is remarkable compared to Barkov, but IMO, that's about all he has over Barkov. Barkov is bigger and appears to have a keener hockey sense. Mackinnon seems to be more of a goal scorer/individual player. I place a higher value than most on playmakers. I just might take Barkov over Mackinnon if given the choice. However I'd gladly take either.

FYI, Mackinnon went first overall, then Seth Jones went second.

Daddy Longlegs is offline  
Old
11-23-2012, 08:48 AM
  #233
Huffer
Registered User
 
Huffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,133
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daddy Longlegs View Post
Just found a recent mock draft for the upcoming draft. Jets picked third and took Barkov. Ohhhhhhh how I wish this was actuality. I love this kid. He might be my most coveted player in the draft. If we got first pick I'd have to think long and hard between Mackinnon and Barkov. Mackinnon's skating is remarkable compared to Barkov, but IMO, that's about all he has over Barkov. Barkov is bigger and appears to have a keener hockey sense. Mackinnon seems to be more of a goal scorer/individual player. I place a higher value than most on playmakers. I just might take Barkov over Mackinnon if given the choice. However I'd gladly take either.

FYI, Mackinnon went first overall, then Seth Jones went second.
The things people are saying about Barkov have me very interested as well. What he's doing in a men's league for an undrafted player is unprecedented.

No disrespect to Drouin, Lindholm, or Monahan, and even tho it's early and things can change, it looks like there's a top 3 of Mackinnon, Jones, and Barkov.

Not saying that the dropoff is even that big, but it looks like those 3 are a little ahead. (For now.......)

Huffer is online now  
Old
11-25-2012, 10:13 PM
  #234
Bob E
Registered User
 
Bob E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Winnerpeg
Posts: 2,470
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huffer View Post
The things people are saying about Barkov have me very interested as well. What he's doing in a men's league for an undrafted player is unprecedented.

No disrespect to Drouin, Lindholm, or Monahan, and even tho it's early and things can change, it looks like there's a top 3 of Mackinnon, Jones, and Barkov.

Not saying that the dropoff is even that big, but it looks like those 3 are a little ahead. (For now.......)
I agree.

But even a top 10 pick this year should yield a great prospect.

Bob E is offline  
Old
11-25-2012, 10:14 PM
  #235
Bob E
Registered User
 
Bob E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Winnerpeg
Posts: 2,470
vCash: 500
Sounds like Monahan's 10 game suspension takes him right to WJC tryouts.

Bob E is offline  
Old
11-25-2012, 10:29 PM
  #236
Mathil8
▌▌▌│▌▌│▌▌▌│▌▌│▌▌▌│▌▌
 
Mathil8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Country: Canada
Posts: 356
vCash: 1117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob E View Post
Sounds like Monahan's 10 game suspension takes him right to WJC tryouts.
Ouch, 10 games for that hit is kind of overkill. Didn't even connect that well, looked like a glance.

Mathil8 is offline  
Old
11-25-2012, 11:05 PM
  #237
JetsHomer
Registered User
 
JetsHomer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,028
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathil8 View Post
Ouch, 10 games for that hit is kind of overkill. Didn't even connect that well, looked like a glance.
Deliberate elbow to head. Doesn't matter how much he hit him. To be it looked like he did it on purpose

JetsHomer is online now  
Old
11-26-2012, 12:23 AM
  #238
Mathil8
▌▌▌│▌▌│▌▌▌│▌▌│▌▌▌│▌▌
 
Mathil8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Country: Canada
Posts: 356
vCash: 1117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying High View Post
Deliberate elbow to head. Doesn't matter how much he hit him. To be it looked like he did it on purpose
All I've seen is this highlight video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uy6iB8oTbDs. From that angle it doesn't look intentional to me. Looks like he was just finishing his check and missed the target. Either way, definitely not a clean hit haha, and who knows, maybe it was intentional. Either way 10 games for that is a little severe IMO. But it is what it is, sends a message.

Mathil8 is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 03:14 AM
  #239
buyinnow
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 114
vCash: 500
top of the 13 draft board

A) What teams would select SJones over NMackinnon ?

B) What teams would select ABarkov over SJones?

buyinnow is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 10:47 AM
  #240
untouchable21
You've been TROUBA'D
 
untouchable21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Outer Limits.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,763
vCash: 500
Impossible to know for sure because teams often preach about taking the best player available regardless of position or team needs.

Just based on team needs, I could see Columbus, Florida, NYI, Phoenix, Toronto and the JETS taking Barkov ahead of Jones unless there is something particular they do not like about Barkov's game.

Other than maybe Philadelphia, I cannot see any team passing on MacKinnon for Jones though. Not even teams like Edmonton, or Detroit who would love to have a blue chip defenseman in their prospect ranks. Edmonton would love a one two punch of RNH and Mackinnon and Detroit hasn't selected that high since 1990 and Datsyuk and Zetterberg are not getting any younger.

untouchable21 is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 01:24 PM
  #241
Sweech
COYS!
 
Sweech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,824
vCash: 50
I'm really hoping we have some of our pro scouting staff doing some prospect scouting this year while there's no NHL hockey.

I think we have a solid pro scouting staff, their track record with low-key signings impresses me. While I think our prospect scouting staff leaves a little to be desired.

What concerns me the most is it seems like a lot of the high end prospects and a lot of the depth of this draft is in leagues that aren't our forte, the QMJHL and Europe. This is a pretty down year for the OHL and the WHL is hovering around average.

Hopefully we're able to get adequate scouting in those areas and really maximize the opportunity this team has. A lottery draft could put us in a better position than we would have been in plus we have 4 picks in the top 60 and 6 picks in the top 90.

We really need to maximize what is being considered a fairly deep draft year.

Sweech is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 02:46 PM
  #242
Paradise
Individual thinker
 
Paradise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Waiverpeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sweech View Post
I'm really hoping we have some of our pro scouting staff doing some prospect scouting this year while there's no NHL hockey.

I think we have a solid pro scouting staff, their track record with low-key signings impresses me. While I think our prospect scouting staff leaves a little to be desired.

What concerns me the most is it seems like a lot of the high end prospects and a lot of the depth of this draft is in leagues that aren't our forte, the QMJHL and Europe. This is a pretty down year for the OHL and the WHL is hovering around average.

Hopefully we're able to get adequate scouting in those areas and really maximize the opportunity this team has. A lottery draft could put us in a better position than we would have been in plus we have 4 picks in the top 60 and 6 picks in the top 90.

We really need to maximize what is being considered a fairly deep draft year.
Completely agree Sweech. There seems to be a lot of quality and depth in the QMJHL and Europe this year. The WHL, OHL and College all seem to lack in some way or another (depth, high end, etc). Let's hope the Jets scouting staff puts in the time in all the leagues anyways.

Paradise is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 04:42 PM
  #243
Grind
Stomacheache AllStar
 
Grind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Manitoba
Posts: 3,701
vCash: 500
This is sort off topic and more about the draft in general. Mods please move to where you think it fits.

You often here about the percentage chance of success in the NHL based off round of a draft pick (1st vs 2nd vs 4th etc). I looked into it a little more indepthly (breaking it down by chunks of 5 within the first round [1-5, 6-10, etc]) and though i haven't finished crunching the numbers something did jump out at me
First round draft picks are horribly over valued

at least in Fans eyes. Honestly, the likely hood of ending up with a top 6/4 player outside of a top 5 pick is far from a garauntee.

I haven't finished running the numbers completely, going to do that later when i get home, but while looking at the data there seems to be very little difference after the top 5. I'll post the actual numbers when i finish but it seems like picks 6-20 all have a very similar rate of success and i don't think 20-30 are even that far off.

Really does put some players (Burmistrov is what started this) in perspective vs expectations.

Grind is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 08:44 PM
  #244
ps241
2.6% chance
 
ps241's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 9,064
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grind View Post
This is sort off topic and more about the draft in general. Mods please move to where you think it fits.

You often here about the percentage chance of success in the NHL based off round of a draft pick (1st vs 2nd vs 4th etc). I looked into it a little more indepthly (breaking it down by chunks of 5 within the first round [1-5, 6-10, etc]) and though i haven't finished crunching the numbers something did jump out at me
First round draft picks are horribly over valued

at least in Fans eyes. Honestly, the likely hood of ending up with a top 6/4 player outside of a top 5 pick is far from a garauntee.

I haven't finished running the numbers completely, going to do that later when i get home, but while looking at the data there seems to be very little difference after the top 5. I'll post the actual numbers when i finish but it seems like picks 6-20 all have a very similar rate of success and i don't think 20-30 are even that far off.

Really does put some players (Burmistrov is what started this) in perspective vs expectations.
I look forward to the results and I remember Holden talking about the curse of just missing the playoffs year after year and how the 10th pick perennially is kind of the curse where you are doomed to repeat. (loose paraphrase and I hope I got the spirit of it right)

ps241 is online now  
Old
11-26-2012, 10:34 PM
  #245
Grind
Stomacheache AllStar
 
Grind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Manitoba
Posts: 3,701
vCash: 500
Removed this post as I redid my study below


Last edited by Grind: 11-27-2012 at 05:25 PM.
Grind is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 11:44 PM
  #246
Sweech
COYS!
 
Sweech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,824
vCash: 50
Grind, how many years did you look at for this?

Plus I'm not entirely surprised about the first round. The top 5's success rate was bound to boost the 1st round's overall rate.

Sweech is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 12:05 AM
  #247
Grind
Stomacheache AllStar
 
Grind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Manitoba
Posts: 3,701
vCash: 500
This is only over 13 years I believe ( the the most recent being tavares year)

Again I didn't have a solid criteria and at that point I was getting to a lot note players I was unfamiliar with. I hope to revisit but the issue there us going much farther back then the mid 90s results in too many changes in tech and the game to consider it the same dat

Grind is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 01:55 PM
  #248
Holden Caulfield
Moderator
Perennial Skeptic
 
Holden Caulfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,440
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps241 View Post
I look forward to the results and I remember Holden talking about the curse of just missing the playoffs year after year and how the 10th pick perennially is kind of the curse where you are doomed to repeat. (loose paraphrase and I hope I got the spirit of it right)
Yup, that's it. It's my biggest fear with this current edition of the Jets, it's where I see them heading right now unless they begin to make some strides.

@ Grind, I agree with your findings. Picks from 6-15 are traditionally very very overrated, as are 2nd round picks. The odds of those players becoming impact players are not nearly as high as we would like to believe. For every Anze Kopitar (11th pick), you have dozens of Gilbert Brules, Brian Lees, Jack Skilles, Marek Zagrapans, Sasha Pokoluk, etc to take one draft year example. The elite talent is surprisingly hard to find in that area.

It's easy to get stuck in what Kings GM Dean Lombardi called "the black hole". Stuck to never be a real contender, but never bad enough to gain the elite talent needed to become that contender. Don't want that to happen to the Jets, but right now it looks like that's where we are headed, IMO. Which why I keep stressing this as a time where the Jets are going to need to make big steps NOW, or pretty much indefinitely be stuck in that area with this core. No team is going to consistently pull much talent out of that area.

Holden Caulfield is online now  
Old
11-27-2012, 02:09 PM
  #249
Grind
Stomacheache AllStar
 
Grind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Manitoba
Posts: 3,701
vCash: 500
Draft Position Vs Success

EDITED:

Ok so i think i have tables sorted below. First things first

criteria for the update will be:

10 years study (99-08 draft) I have excluded previous years due to changing natur of game and change of draft. I will be revisiting and adding this info later (with some adjustments in criteria for "impact" players playing primarily pre-lockout)

Forwards: Scored at 45 pts/82gp rate in 2 or more season, with at least 35 games played in each season, or 1 season if it was last year.

defensemen: ETOI/per game of 19 minute + in at least 2 or more seasons, with at least 35 games played, or one season if it was last year.

draft table. A 1 designates success.

YEAR123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930TOTALAvg % success
20081111000001010010100101000110001240
20071110111010010100000001000100001136.67
20061111111001110000010001101001001550.00
20051110100100110000001010010000101136.67
20041101100010001110000110100110101446.67
20031111111111101100101100110001001963.33
20021111111100111100100000011000001550.00
20011101011010011000001110100000001240.00
20001111110000001000010110010001101343.33
1999011010000000000110001000010000723.33

Averages per round (success count in players and probability)

pick123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930Average
Total succesful players out of 1091087865343465421423553442423304.3
Avg percent chance of succes90100807080605030403040605040201040203050503040402040203030043

Probability by 5 pick "blocks"

BlockAvg % 
1 to 584 
6 to 1042 
11 to 1542 
16 to 2030 
21 to 2536 
26 to 3024 

The Low down

Avg Chance of impact player in first round: 42.33% or 12.7 per

highest rate of success: pick # 2: 100% success rate

top 5: 84% 1st over all 90% (thanks patrick stefan). #2: 100%, #3: 80%, #4: 70%, #5: 80%. - Obviously the most successful block of 5. Nothing outlandish here. Your top 3 picks are pretty much the only spots your guaraunteed a top 6 player.

6-10: 42% 6: 60%, 7: 50%, 8: 30%, 9: 40%, 10: 30% -As found initially, a very sharp drop off from this and the last category. A pick in the 8, 9, 10 range really is not worth the value it seems to hold.

11-15: 42%11: 40%, 12: 60%, 13: 50%, 14: 40%, 15: 20%-My improved criteria still maintains that outside of the top 7, picks 12 and 13 are the best bang for your buck both with suprisingly higher success rates then a number of picks in front of them. if not for the poor success rate of pick # 15, this block would be better then the block before it.

16-20: 30%16: 10%, 17:40%, 18: 20%, 19: 30%, 20: 50% - An interesting block in that it is worse then both the block before it and after it, with it's strongest pick being it's last at number 20. The anomaly of how poorly pick # 16 performs is interesting to note.

21-25: 36% 21: 50%, 22: 30%, 23: 40%, 24: 40%, 25: 20% - Surpising...4 of the 5 picks in this block have the same statistical returns as those in the 6-10 block. That top 10 sure isn't looking that swell anymore...

26-30: 24% 26: 40%, 27: 20%, 28:30%, 29: 30%, 30: 0% - Value sure can still be found for the cup contenders in the tail end of the draft, unfortunately just not for the cup winner. Over the 10 drafts examined not a single 30 thoverall pick became an impact player.

to sum it up, Whats it All Mean?

We can draw a number of conclusions based off this though its hardly concrete (a much bigger sample size would be ideal).

Conclusion number 1: Fans are out to lunch (myself included)

It's true, especially here on HFBoards where the 1st round pick is worth it's weight in gold. In the offseason, when nothings been determined for the following year, that pick has only a 43% chance of being anything more then 3rd pairing or 3rd line grinder. Nashville giving up 1st for Paul Gausted doesn't look so ridiculous now...

Conclusion Number 2: Trading up is a bad idea

Given the cost often associated with trading up, GM's are certainly almost always better off sitting tight. In fact, it can be argued that if your sitting just inside the top 10 (8th-10th) you should be burning up the phone lines trying to find that gm with the 2 first rounders in the bottom 13 for you. Even in the final 5, if your not sitting 30th, it hardly seems worth moving any additional assets for 10% increase in probability of landing something meaningful. On the flipside, the Stanley cup champ should always move his first rounder.


Conclusion Number 3: Go Easy on Your Prospects

I know we all have big dreams for Scheifele, Burmistrov, and Trouba, but realistically only Scheifele's looking at a more then 50% chance of success. Odds are only one of Burmi or Trouba become a meaningful player, so perhaps a tempering of expectations is in order.

Keep in mind, these aren't even the percentages for First line/ top pairing, but top 6/ top 4.

Conclusion Number 4: 1999 was garbage. Just saying...if there was a year you were going to bust, it was that one. Thanks Patrick Stefan!
Attached Files
File Type: xlsx DRAFT VS SUCCESS v1.xlsx‎ (18.7 KB, 4 views)


Last edited by Grind: 11-27-2012 at 05:09 PM.
Grind is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 07:00 PM
  #250
allan5oh
#Dive4Five #31Buyout
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,650
vCash: 50
I'm going to guess that you didn't post that from your phone.

allan5oh is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:02 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.